It would appear the process to get a local city or provincial OGL added is somewhat more complicated than i expected. After reviewing the LGW notes it appears there was a request that originated from this forum that i had no idea existed. I am really trying to do my best here to do the right thing, and it’s been confusing, completely undocumented or controlled every step of the way. So to recap:
In 2022 after realizing there was open data for Edmonton I posted a diary entry and was quickly informed by a kind user that prior to any use one should add appropriate attribution to the wiki. Okay no problem, inspecting Edmonton, St. Albert, Calgary they appeared virtually identical to any of the others that appeared on the wiki. I added attribution and continued on my way. I’ve used the Edmonton, Calgary, St. Albert open data sources repeatedly since assuming I was good to go.
Approximately a week ago i was informed by a fellow user that there is a LWG that is actively reviewing Canadian OGLs. So obviously some concern that i might have messed up. I’ve halted using the data for imports, send an email to the legal questions email outlining the concern and received no response. So, i am absolutely up the creek on what is the process, if i am in the clear, what is required and why on earth anyone can just update the attributions wiki. Hence i’ve posted here in hopes someone in the know knows what to do.
additional smaller centers that seem to adopt the broader Alberta license
(i can’t link more that 3 links as a new forum user…)
open.alberta.ca/licence
St. Albert
Airdrie
Red Deer
Cochrane
Canmore
If I’ve messed up my apologies, i thought i did my due diligence and i am doing my best to try get this Infront of the right people and i have no idea how to do so. Thanks for anyone’s guidance!
Come on, this is getting a bit absurd. It’s been weeks since my email to legal questions with no acknowledgement of receipt, let alone a response, zero response on here for help to kick the can down the road.
Another user is also making a fresh request and another is months past due after following the exact same procedures.
Does literally anyone here have anyway to bubble up community issues or put in a ticket?
Can we not work as a group to filter out a set of OGLs that look the part and just need a rubber stamp to make their efforts? Like this is such a waste of resources and time working from a piecemeal process. I know everyone here volunteers their time and would rather be mapping but we need some help to get this in motion. I also know there are some passionate folks that would love to get their cities setup too if we can do a little work together and have some help to prioritize it with whatever powers that be need to be involved.
I will keep playing by the rules, but it is getting to the point where who cares if no one out there sees it as an issue worthy of effort.
That is fantastic! Great update and great work on getting it in motion!
Also opens the doors for the cities in the province that follow the same basic format (i hope). It does seem like most provinces have adopted this format as well so hopefully we can help out the LWG and make progress everywhere else that is still missing too.
Just to help keep the ball rolling for everyone. I am working on a general tracking form for use with the community to update most of Canadian larger centers for licenses if they seem to follow the generally accepted now candian/provincal OGLs format that might be okay and if they have been reviewed by the LWG. Also, attributions on the wiki (just a heads up we are still missing the Guelph one from the most recent LWG update if anyone in the wiki). Good news is, there really are a lot of cities that have adopted the proper license we could work towards moving along as the working group could accommodate and users have need.
I am trying to figure out a good place for the table to reside for everyone to have access, ability to review and edit and how to package up the licenses for comparison to help facilitate requests to LWG. If anyone has suggestions for a excel type sheet or similar that we can all have access too I would really appreciate it.
. Huge updates from the LWG folks!! Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Surrey and Hamilton all made the cut. We also have some helpful guidelines to help filter out and facilitate a request as needed. Kudos to everyone that has been putting in requests and doing all the leg work!!
some guidelines to help courtesy Kathleen Lu of the LWG
Generally speaking, if the only change to the licence from the federal version a change to the locality (from Ontario/federal to the relevant local province/city), the licence is likely compatible.
The locality tends to be changed in the following places, which are inconsequential (using Calgary as an example):
Under attribution, “Contains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – City of Calgary.”
Under Governing law, “This licence is governed by the laws of the province of Alberta and the applicable laws of Canada.”
Under Governing law, “Legal proceedings related to this licence may only be brought in the courts of Alberta.”
Under Definitions, “Information Provider” means The City of Calgary.
There are other changes that may be inconsequential, but the locality ones are easiest to explain and apply. You can run a diff to confirm what the differences are between a new licence and an already-deemed compatible one. When you request that LWG approve, you can send us the diff, which will make review faster.
In my little deep dive provinces have all generally adopted the same federal OGL so generally most up to date cities tend to roll up to the proper OGL and we can perform a quick audit and highlight the changes to help out the LWG on future requests. I will keep updating my list to help everyone out. From my high-level review so far there are lots of cities that are good to go we can address.
I propose we get all remaining provinces reviewed and start to bulk up cities, and municipalities per province that roll up to the relevant licenses. Input from locals on priority would probably be best or have the resources to submit on their own.
We can also use the provincial license information to submit locally to any stragglers to adopt.
Apologies for being pushy all. Just playing the role of squeaky wheel to get us all setup with excellent data resources to do what we excel at.
. Huge updates from the LWG folks!! Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Surrey and Hamilton all made the cut. We also have some helpful guidelines to help filter out and facilitate a request as needed. Kudos to everyone that has been putting in requests and doing all the leg work!!